Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to be sceptical about man made climate change

753 replies

Brioche201 · 12/12/2015 21:11

.. to a layperson like myself the evidence does not seem robust (record antarctic ice caps) .Even if it were true 'the climate' is such a complicated thing affected by thousands of factors.Is it likely that changing just one or 2 of the factors that are within out control would make a difference (or even that the difference would be in the right direction)
Do you still believe in man made climate change or think it is mainly rooted in politics?

OP posts:
Furiosa · 13/12/2015 17:32

claig what do you think happens to the carbon humans release into the atmosphere?

Egosumquisum · 13/12/2015 17:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Lweji · 13/12/2015 17:33

Yes, leading and skeptic.
I wonder how unbiased he is. Or not at all.
And who pays him...

Egosumquisum · 13/12/2015 17:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Egosumquisum · 13/12/2015 17:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Dipankrispaneven · 13/12/2015 17:34

Good grief, even climate change sceptics dismiss most of Piers Corbyn's views - not least because he totally denies that there is any carbon effect whatsoever, and refuses to reveal his methodology or submit his methods for peer review.

Apparently he frequently bets on the accuracy of his forecasts, and founded a company to profit from his predictions in 1997. It suffered losses of £70,000 in the first year, and £480,000 in the second. Corbyn claimed that the failure was because of his company's small size compared to high overheads, which was a bit odd when compared to public statements that the business was "turning over" £250,000 compared to overhead costs of £70,000. Remembered particularly fondly are his prediction that there would be killer storms in mid October and late November 2007 which never happened; and that January 2008 would be a period of intense cold (-17C) - it turned out to be one of the warmest Januarys on record. Subsequently he's made it more difficult to publicise such errors as he bans the publication of extracts of his forecasts.

And that is the person you base your views on, Claig? Really?

Lweji · 13/12/2015 17:34

This reminds me of the creationist arguments.

claig · 13/12/2015 17:34

'claig what do you think happens to the carbon humans release into the atmosphere?'

As far as I understand, it helps plants grow, but I am not a scientific expert, I am a political expert.

Dipankrispaneven · 13/12/2015 17:35

Being described as a "leading sceptic" is no guarantee of scientific reliability.

Dipankrispaneven · 13/12/2015 17:36

Claig, you cannot claim to be a political expert on climate change unless you make at least some effort to understand the science involved.

CoteDAzur · 13/12/2015 17:36

"I heard about it because I heard that due to I think that, Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, reported Greenpeace to the FBI or something"

If ever it was possible for your posts to get more unintelligible, claig Hmm

Will you just stop? Really. You support UKIP, clamor for Donald Trump, sing praise for Daily Mail and Fox News, and now you fly the banner of climate change denial? Is there no issue where you are NOT aggressively wrong? FFS.

claig · 13/12/2015 17:37

'Good grief, even climate change sceptics dismiss most of Piers Corbyn's views'

Have you got a link for that?

'And that is the person you base your views on, Claig? Really?'

No, I said there are many others, he is just one. But I don't argue it on the science because I think it is about politics.

Lweji · 13/12/2015 17:37

CO2 could help plants grow. However, there is massive tropical forest destruction. And desertification through excessive water consumption and increased heat.
Not sure which plants you think will absorb the extra CO2.

Egosumquisum · 13/12/2015 17:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 13/12/2015 17:38

"As far as I understand, it helps plants grow, but I am not a scientific expert, I am a political expert."

You are not a political expert. You are a conspiracy theorist who gets his frequently incorrect 'information' from dodgy websites and substandard news outlets like Daily Mail and Fox News.

claig · 13/12/2015 17:39

'If ever it was possible for your posts to get more unintelligible, claig'

Have you heard of Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace? Google Greenpeace, Moore and FBI and you will find it. I heard it in passing, I didn't find out what it was about because I already know that climate change is a scam so I didn't think it was interesting enough to look into.

CoteDAzur · 13/12/2015 17:40

Are you a bot? Your reply has no relation to the quote.

Furiosa · 13/12/2015 17:41

claig You really really need to understand this for your argument to make any sense.

The carbon cycle is really not very difficult to understand. 10 mins on wikipedia might enlighten you, if not for your sake but then for the argument you care so much for.

Also, have you heard of ocean acidification?

Lweji · 13/12/2015 17:41

You're not the first to think so, Cote.

Egosumquisum · 13/12/2015 17:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Dipankrispaneven · 13/12/2015 17:44

But I don't argue it on the science because I think it is about politics.

No, you don't argue it on the science because you are unable to do so. At least have the honesty to accept that.

CoteDAzur · 13/12/2015 17:45

You lot don't get it. Mankind doesn't affect climate change because Piers Corbyn says so, and what can a political expert do but believe him over and above all scientists and scientific organisations saying the opposite?

claig · 13/12/2015 17:45

'Also, have you heard of ocean acidification?'

Yes I have heard of it, but I don't look at the science. If you look at the science, are there scientists who disagree that it is a major danger or caused by climate change?

claig · 13/12/2015 17:46

'you don't argue it on the science because you are unable to do so. At least have the honesty to accept that.'

Yes because I have not looked into the science of it so can't argue on that.

CoteDAzur · 13/12/2015 17:47

"I don't look at the science."

Then you don't get to have the right to an opinion on this subject.